Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Dharampal Singh and A.N.Chaturvedi JJ.
Rupan Yadav
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 1993 ;
Decided On : JANUARY 3, 1996
{'KEYWORD': 'Murder', 'SUBJECT': 'Conviction and Sentence', 'ACT SECTION LIST': 'Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code'}
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Jan Mohammad Mian, was killed by the appellants, Rupan Yadav and Baini Yadav alias Bagani Yadav, in a forest known as Drogwa forest. The motive for the murder was that the appellants had enmity with one Elahi Mian, who happened to be the Samdhi of the deceased and the appellants did not like that the deceased should meet Elahi Mian.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence on the record was not sufficient or satisfactory to justify the finding of conviction as given by the trial Court. The court noted that the informant, who was the only eyewitness, had given inconsistent and unreliable evidence. The court also noted that there was a long delay in sending the first information report along with the Fardbeyan to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance.
Issues: Whether the evidence on the record was sufficient to justify the finding of conviction of the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence on the record was not sufficient and satisfactory enough to justify the finding of conviction of the appellants. The court noted that the evidence of the informant was not reliable and that there was a long delay in sending the first information report along with the Fardbeyan to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the finding of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial court against the appellants, and directed that the appellant No.1 (Rupan Yadav), who is in custody, be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case(s), and the other appellant be discharged from the liability of the bail bond.
Dharampal Singh, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19-1-1993 passed in Sessions Trial No. 221/1990/285/ 1991 by Sri Nirmalendu Kumar Kanth Niraj, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamui, whereby the two appellants in this appeal, namely, Rupan Yadav and Baini Yadav alias Bagani Yadav have been convicted of the offence punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
2. The case of the prosecution as disclosed from the Fardbeyan (Ext. 6) recorded on the statement of the informant. Mohammad Suddin (P.W. 1), is that the informant alongwith his father. Jan Mohammad Mian (the deceased) while proceeding from their house in village Tarakura towards Jhajha had reached in a forest, known as Drogwa forest at about p.m. on 14-10-1989, the informant sat down to urinate, while his father Jan Mohammad Mian proceeded ahead. When the informant got up after making water, he saw that the appellant. Bagani had caught hold of Jan Mohammad Mian, while the other appellant. Rupan Yadav was stabbing at him. When the informant saw this occurrence, the appellants chased him up to some distance. The informant went to a village Barasingha running and there he met his uncle, Sultan Mian and his cousin, Abbas Mian, who were manufacturing Biri at the premises of one Md. Halim. The informant told them about the occurrence and then he alongwith them came to the place of occurrence where Jan Mohammad Mian was found dead in pool of blood. When the informant started proceeding towards the police station for lodging information, a police officer happened to reach there and the Fardbeyan (Ext. 6) was recorded by the police officer (P.W. 5) Shyam Kumar Singh, on the basis of which the case was instituted by drawing up a formal first information report (Ext. 5).
3. The motive of the occurrence, according to the prosecution, was that the appellants had enmity with one Elahi Mian, who happened to by the Samdhi of the deceased and the appellants did not like that the deceased should meet Elahi Mian, and the appellants had previously threatened the deceased, asking him not to meet Elahi Mian.
4. The defence of the accused appellants was complete denial of the allegation and according to them Jan Mohammad Mian had been killed by one Baddu Mian, who happened to be the sala of the informant, with the assistance of another person for the reason that the informant had divorced his wife, who was living not at the place of the informant but at her parents place and this fact had been disliked by Baddu Mian Sala (brother-in-laws) of the informant.
5. In course of trial the prosecution could produce in all five witnesses and five witnesses had also been examined by the defence. Out of the five prosecution witnesses P.W. 1 (Mohammad Suddin) figured as eye witnesses of the occurrence. P.W. 2 (Md. Rauf) is a witness, who stated to have gone to the place of occurrence after hearing about the killing of Jan Mohammad Mian and learnt therefrom the informant the names of the assaillant. P.W. 3 (Shekhawat) was tendered, P.W. 4 is Doctor, Anjani Kumar Sinha, who had done post mortem examination on the dead body of Jan Mohammad Mian and had prepared the post mortem report (Ext.l). And P.W. 5 (Shyam Kumar Singh) was the Investigating Officer.
6. Out of the defence witnesses some of them have specifically stated that Baddu Mian assisted by, one Sultan Mian had stabbed Jan Mohammad Mian and some of the defence witnesses deposed about divorce that had taken place between the informant and his wife and a Panchayat that had been done in that regard. It is needless to say that the defence evidence - hardly requires much consideration because the question for consideration in this appeal is not whether Baddti Mian had killed the deceased with the help of Sultan Mian.
7. Learned trial Court after considering the evidence and mainly relying on the evidence of P.W.1, the informant, the
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
